Find cruise particularly useful where there are a lot of cameras particularly in road works etc.Instead of concentrating a lot on maintaining your speed you can focus on the road and traffic around you.

 

Oh and thanks Neily03 for the info re the light switch, big improvement then over the old system.

 

 

TP

But id definitely argue that bi xenons are not a safety feature because of the problems bright lights can cause on coming drivers. Always good to be able to switch down to 'normal dipped beam' brightness

BAD argument. Bi xenon means xenon dipped and main beam, so they dip! I have not experienced bright lights affecting me, from xenon fitted cars, nor do mine affect others. There are some charvas, in their Corsas, with xenon bulbs/kits who may have wrongly set lights, but factory fitted xenons are simply brighter. They are not dazzling and, I repeat, work exactly like any other bulbed headlight, dip and main.

just need cruise control, auto dimmer rear view mirror and rain sensing wipers. Oh, no to mention the front arm rest.

vRS only needs cruise then, as the rain sensing wipers and dimming rear view mirror are standard. The lack of a right foot rest is a nuisance for cruise, I have that option as I love it, but hate the no rest.

Edited 27 December, 201312 yr by fireftrm

But id definitely argue that bi xenons are not a safety feature because of the problems bright lights can cause on coming drivers. Always good to be able to switch down to 'normal dipped beam' brightness

BAD argument. Bi xenon means xenon dipped and main beam, so they dip! I have not experienced bright lights affecting me, from xenon fitted cars, nor do mine affect others. There are some charvas, in their Corsas, with xenon bulbs/kits who may have wrongly set lights, but factory fitted xenons are simply brighter. They are not dazzling and, I repeat, work exactly like any other bulbed headlight, dip and main.

just need cruise control, auto dimmer rear view mirror and rain sensing wipers. Oh, no to mention the front arm rest.

vRS only needs cruise then, as the rain sensing wipers and dimming rear view mirror are standard. The lack of a right foot rest is a nuisance for cruise, I have that option as I love it, but hate the no rest.

Oh i know Xenons dip. You mentioned you have dipped xenon, and full beam xenon. But did you also say dipped Xenons were brighter than your last car on full beam? Thats how i read it anyway. If so, your Xenons are very bright, even on dipped.

Now perhaps the different type of light means it isnt dazzling for other drivers. I however remain to be convinced of that. Unfortunately, not knowing anybody who definitely as Xenons, I couldnt do a test. What i do know though, is that i get dazzled by an awful lot of cars nowadays. Are we saying they are all on full beam normals?

 

Yes i think vRS definitely needs cruise. I still wouldnt purchase it, as i prefer a more understated car (no spoiler etc), and something not set up for sporty driving. Ie dont need sports suspension and the larger wheels. 

Anyways, we shall agree to disagree on whether xenons are dazzling or not. Im yet to be convinced.

Im The happy owner of a MK 3 VRS , i Chopped in my Superb for it ( 170bhp SE spec). The only Time i miss the Superb is When i visit Family in Nottingham the Long Drive from Germany was a doddle, pain free, awesome Fuel consumption, lovely and quite a fantastic motorway Cruiser. Same Journey in the VRS is the polar opposite but i knew that would be the case, just hope the fuel consumption improves as it's no Where near what skoda claim.

Some of these arguments are really rubbish and petty (and bloomin' hilarious), particularly the ones saying Xenons are dangerous and the sporty versions of cars are going to die out due to no one wanting them :D

I chose the VRS because it has the better diesel engine (it's going to be a towcar) and it's something that isn't a run of the mill estate - it's something a little bit different. The elegance has/is neither.

You pay your money, you take your choice

Some of these arguments are really rubbish and petty (and bloomin' hilarious), particularly the ones saying Xenons are dangerous and the sporty versions of cars are going to die out due to no one wanting them :D

I chose the VRS because it has the better diesel engine (it's going to be a towcar) and it's something that isn't a run of the mill estate - it's something a little bit different. The elegance has/is neither.

You pay your money, you take your choice

No petty arguments. I purely said i believe Xenons will be dangerous for on coming drivers as i would have thought the brighter light would mean more chance of dazzling the other drovers. If i am wrong, then i apologise, but i am yet to be convinced.

Some of these arguments are really rubbish and petty (and bloomin' hilarious), particularly the ones saying Xenons are dangerous and the sporty versions of cars are going to die out due to no one wanting them :D

I chose the VRS because it has the better diesel engine (it's going to be a towcar) and it's something that isn't a run of the mill estate - it's something a little bit different. The elegance has/is neither.

You pay your money, you take your choice

You say the vrs tdi is a little bit different from the 2.0tdi but my question earlier in this thread was is it significantly different like the vrs tsi is over the 1.4tsi?

From others comments I've gleaned it probably isn't and those twin exhausts are horrendous imo. Can't even see the exhaust on the 2.0tdi!

 Can't even see the exhaust on the 2.0tdi!

Just checked mine, and you have to get on your hands and knees to see it. Brilliant!

No petty arguments. I purely said i believe Xenons will be dangerous for on coming drivers as i would have thought the brighter light would mean more chance of dazzling the other drovers. If i am wrong, then i apologise, but i am yet to be convinced.

It's all about where and how the beam pattern is focused. A high quality factory fit Xenon headlight will be brighter but that light will be focused tightly onto the road surface so should not impact at the eye level of oncoming traffic. They will also have self-levelling to keep the beam pattern on the road surface when the gradient changes. Bi-Xenons don't actually 'diip' at all - they have a shutter mechanism which cuts off the top half of the beam - which is then lifted to expose the 'main' /full beam.

I've never really felt dazzled by factory Xenons. It's aftermarket HID kits stuffed into a standard reflector headlight which really get on my nerves. The glare from those is really bad! :-)

It's all about where and how the beam pattern is focused. A high quality factory fit Xenon headlight will be brighter but that light will be focused tightly onto the road surface so should not impact at the eye level of oncoming traffic. They will also have self-levelling to keep the beam pattern on the road surface when the gradient changes. Bi-Xenons don't actually 'diip' at all - they have a shutter mechanism which cuts off the top half of the beam - which is then lifted to expose the 'main' /full beam.

I've never really felt dazzled by factory Xenons. It's aftermarket HID kits stuffed into a standard reflector headlight which really get on my nerves. The glare from those is really bad! :-)

In which case i apologise. Sorry, but never realised there was so much to them.

In which case i apologise. Sorry, but never realised there was so much to them.

No need to apologise dude. That's the great thing about this forum - it's a great place for friendly debate and banter. It's also quite informative too!

There is so much to them, plus I never said anything about my last car, or how much brighter xenon lamps are than halogen, dipped, or main beam. But they are and they do not dazzle, as I think you must now realise. If they did they would not be legal!

Edited 27 December, 201312 yr by fireftrm

I don't understand why xenons are being talked about like they're new, they've been around for 20 years or more so you only had to go out on the roads to find they don't dazzle, there's thousands of cars out there with them.

Eww no! Next there'll be taking after Honda!

I suppose what I was trying to say earlier, is i cannot see the point of Bi Xenons. Hence the headlight comment. As long as the elegance has headlights, hey why pay more for another type of headlights! But thats me, and as mentioned, i just need cruise control, auto dimmer rear view mirror and rain sensing wipers. Oh, no to mention the front arm rest. Ah, lovely.

The vrs also has armrest! Only early mark II's suffered from not having one

There's a lot of Vrs jealousy on here I think,elegance is a nice car but the Vrs just stands out on its own. End of story. And the 184bhp is a lot more than the 150. There a few lads on here could not wait for the Vrs and bought an elegance that are kicking themselves I'd say.

I'd find it very have to go back to a basic style octavia. Just put one beside the other and there's no comparison.

There's a lot of Vrs jealousy on here I think,elegance is a nice car but the Vrs just stands out on its own. End of story. And the 184bhp is a lot more than the 150. There a few lads on here could not wait for the Vrs and bought an elegance that are kicking themselves I'd say.

I'd find it very have to go back to a basic style octavia. Just put one beside the other and there's no comparison.

Don't think jealousy has got anything to do with it, its all a matter of personal preference. There isn't a huge difference in cost between the two so I don't think affordibility is the issue, although i was keen to hammer my pcp monthly payment as low as possible. I personally like my cars understated with a little bit of unexpected power when you need it. I have no real interest in uprated suspensions, sporty looking exhausts and flashy badges especially when, according to a number of posters on this thread and others, thats all the real difference there is between the two cars.

There's a lot of Vrs jealousy on here I think,elegance is a nice car but the Vrs just stands out on its own. End of story. And the 184bhp is a lot more than the 150. There a few lads on here could not wait for the Vrs and bought an elegance that are kicking themselves I'd say.

 

 

Get a grip. Your car is nothing special. If you like it, great, but don't fool yourself into thinking it's something that everyone is envious of.

I could have bought a VRS for what I paid for the Elegance, but it wasn't what I wanted so I didn't.

This thread is ridiculous!

This thread is ridiculous!

Still generates alot of interest!

The season of good will is upon us I see.  I bought a VRS because I liked it and I got a better deal than I could have got on the elegance.  I very nearly bought an elegance because I liked it.  Maybe I now wish that I had bought the elegance for the slightly softer ride and sat nav. (The addition of this would have put the price of the car into another class and Skoda wouldn't have been on my list if my purchase price was any higher).  It does annoy me a little when people speak like VRS' are super cars.  They're really not, they're family cars that can go quite quickly when pushed.  And that goes for all variants as far I can see.

The season of good will is upon us I see.  I bought a VRS because I liked it and I got a better deal than I could have got on the elegance.  I very nearly bought an elegance because I liked it.  Maybe I now wish that I had bought the elegance for the slightly softer ride and sat nav. (The addition of this would have put the price of the car into another class and Skoda wouldn't have been on my list if my purchase price was any higher).  It does annoy me a little when people speak like VRS' are super cars.  They're really not, they're family cars that can go quite quickly when pushed.  And that goes for all variants as far I can see.

 

I considered the Vrs tdi aswell although my top two were the 2.0 tdi and 1.4 tsi, but on the afternoon I was trying to do the deal there were only two already built vrs tdi's in the stocklist as far as I can remember, one was an auto which my wife wouldn't drive and the other had every extra under the sun bolted onto it, so sadly they were out of the equation.

 

I think all in all the octy range has a fabulously varied set of engines and every person has a favourite depending on their own personal requirements.

Someone asked earlier in the thread if anyone has bought a 1.2TSi 5 door - we did.

 

We previously owned a 2.0TDCI Mondeo which was ideal for us and we intended replacing it with another Mondeo, but in the last 6 months of ownership we had to fit a new turbocharger at just 80,000 miles and our son with a diesel Golf had an expensive bill to replace his DPF  - putting us off diesels and Fords. Looking at options and reading media reports led us to the Octavia. Looking at the spec - the extras on the SE over the S wasn't worth the extra cost to us - we still get alloy wheels - I prefer the alloys on the S to the SE, the ICE is good on the S, not bothered about the gimmicky ability to change driving mode, we get black mirrors instead of colour matched - on a white car the black look good - in fact on higher model cars black mirrors are charged as an extra! Boot nets? not bothered,  We did a deal with the dealer for cruise control and reversing sensors. Now, we knew we wanted petrol but the 1.2 or the 1.4? We test drove the 1.2 on a 200 mile motorway trip and it performed very similarly to our Mondeo. As 90% of our car use is taken up with an 8 mile trip to work and round town short trips, we decided the 1.2 was OK for us.

 

It was delivered on time, about 10 weeks after ordering - the battery on our Mondeo packed up the week after ordering - another £100 spent.

 

We have now done about 4,000 miles. Car has been faultless and we have been really pleased with it. The load space is perfect for us - one reason we were attracted to the Octavia. For a base model car it has everything we need - I like the lightness when driving round town - it is a bit light on motorways though, and it has a nasty blind spot in the door mirrors which has taken some getting used to. We are getting an average of around 44 mpg nudges 50 mpg in light traffic drops to around 40 mpg with heavy town traffic. Fuel costs are higher than our Mondeo -  we averaged 50mpg in that, but insurance is over £100 pa cheaper and car tax is also £100 ish cheaper.

 

I miss the heated windscreen that we had in the Mondeo and having not had a VAG car before some of the controls feel a little odd but we have got used to them. The radio system is really good - I like the DAB - we can listen to 5 Live clearly at last, I was concerned about the CD player being in the glove box, but once I transferred my ITunes library to an SD card I don't need CDs.

 

The only negatives I have so far is that the headlights are not good enough - I will change the bulbs to something better when I have time, and I find the manual a PITA to find my way around. It would be good if they developed a touch screen manual, built into the Bolero system and specific to the model of car.

 

Overall, the car does everything I want, wasn't too expensive, looks good, drives OK, and is nippy. As long as I get 80 - 90,000 miles out of it with no major repair bills I will be happy.

There's a lot of Vrs jealousy on here I think,elegance is a nice car but the Vrs just stands out on its own. End of story. And the 184bhp is a lot more than the 150. There a few lads on here could not wait for the Vrs and bought an elegance that are kicking themselves I'd say.

I'd find it very have to go back to a basic style octavia. Just put one beside the other and there's no comparison.

Not the most considered of posts I have to say. Whilst I think they are great 'value for money' vehicles I wouldnt personally suggest any Octavia; vRS or otherwise really is a thing of envy.

I think the new Octavia is a great car, probably not quite so good overall as the Golf on which it is based but its way bigger and usefully cheaper than the Golf hence why ive just purchased my 2nd.

As to the vRS TDi being way more car, using fair judgement i wouldnt say thats entirely fair.

Granted the Elegance is quite bland to look at by comparison even with 18" wheels and sports suspension and it goes without some niceties such as Xenons, XDS and independent rear suspension (on all the UK models at least).

However overall the Elegance has more spec at less cost.....something else you are not considering.....yes the 150 TDi is 34hp down on the vRS TDi but care of its lesser rear suspension its over 140kgs lighter. There is as a consequence give or take 10hp/tonne difference in power to weight between a TDi 150/TSi 140 and the vRS TDi which translates to very little difference in go between them, even the on paper figures suggest the same.

Edited 28 December, 201312 yr by pipsyp

The kerb weight of the vRS cannot be down to the rear suspension alone. If you compare a vRS TDI 184 Estate with a TDI 150 4x4, then the later is given as 27kg lighter. The 4x4 also has independent rear suspension, plus a haldex box with associated prop shafts and a larger 55ltr fuel tank to drag round :wonder:

 

So where is the lard coming from

 

 

TP

The kerb weight of the vRS cannot be down to the rear suspension alone. If you compare a vRS TDI 184 Estate with a TDI 150 4x4, then the later is given as 27kg lighter. The 4x4 also has independent rear suspension, plus a haldex box with associated prop shafts and a larger 55ltr fuel tank to drag round :wonder:

So where is the lard coming from

TP

True, the bodykit, seats, brakes, different suspension components and bigger wheels probably help contribute to its weight too, cant think of much else.

didnt realise the 4x4 had a normal size fuel tank either?!